


HO^ 4.6. 6ac£>f^ 



1^^^ 






E 721 
.B12 
Copy 1 



THE RECOGNITION OF CUBAN INDEPENDENCE. 



Discussion on the effect of the vote on the report of the Conference 
Committee on the Cuban resolutions. 



SPEECHES 



OF 

/ 



HON. A. O. BACON, 



OF GEORGIA. 



IN THE 



-l^- 



SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES. 



APRIL 16 AND 19, 1898. 



WASHINGXOX. 

1898. 



\ 



72902 



"^^ ' Co" SPEECU 



^iioN. ArcrsTUS o. bacon. 



April IG, ISDS. 

Tlui S»'nntc hiivlnp uiulor considerntion tlio joint resolution fS. R. 119) for 
til. I.. v!iiti'ii "f i!i- i!..;.pr-ii.l.-Tifr .,f tlio jK-uple of Cuba, deniandiun tbat 
|i . authority and Kovi-rnment in the 

1 and naval for<i-s from Cuba and 

^ :,t of tbo Cnitod States to use tho 

In- .1 .11 1 i...\.il i..r>»-^u! II, ■• I lilt. -a Maus to carry thL-se resolutions into 
rlfirt- 

>Ir. BACON paid: 

Mr. 1'im.->ii>j:nt: I request tbat the (hair will give me notice 
wlu'ii 1 n-adi one niiiiuto of the expiration of my time. 

I rofjret that within tho limited time it will be necessary for me 
tt) sj.eiik rajiidlv, and tbat what 1 sbalUaymust of necessity bo 
N.ini'wbHt disjointed and irreirnl.nr. If I had, however, but one 
niinnte, I would wish to sav this, to which I am moved particu- 
larly by wliat has fiillcn from tho Senator from Wisconsin (Mr. 
SrooNKiil. the Senator from Micliigan (Mr. Bnutows], and tho 
H.i.at.r iVr.iii Connecticut [Mr. Pi.attJ : 1 think it is the greatest 
i; : the part of Senators to attribute to unfriendliness and 

;i ; irit everything which may bo said by Senators not in 

!i with what may Le recommended by the President of 

t ; Stales. I desire for myself to disclaim any such design 

<ir ..;iv >\v\x spirit. The President of the United States has his 
pn n 'gatiyes, and we have ours; ho has his duties, and we have 
ours; and ea<h is responsible for the proper discharge of the same. 

Mr. I'resident, 1 liave not been one of those who desired war. 1 
think it is very greatly to l)0 deplored. I know that it means 
deaili to njany'of tlie pres<'nt generation, and tiiat it means a 
^'ru-youH burden of debt to the next generation. Therefore I have 
enlirely Hvmpnthized with the efTorts of tho President to avert 
war, and if In- had not come to Congress and .said that his efforts 
Were at an end. 1 would be willing, if he desired it, to give him 
htill further opportunity to avert war. It is apparent, however, 
that war must como, and it only remains to shape the issue prop- 
erly. 

iJut, Mr. President, that does not relieve me from the necessity 
of iiassiin; ui)on the grave (pustions which are submitted to-day, 
iti vii-\v of my constitutional obligation to decide upon the ques- 
tion jm nmeinU-rof tlie Senate whether tliere shall be war; and 
if war, in what nuinner it shall be waj^ed. I'nfortunately. I differ 
from the Pn-Hideiit of the I'nited State-* in his recommendations. 
Til'- I're^iilentof the l'nite<l States asks that Congress shall clothe 
\\\u\ with the power to wage war at his discretion. I think it 
w.iuM 1k' tmcon-'titutional to grant him that ])ower, and conse- 
quently 1 can not a;,'ree witli liim. The resolutions ])assed by tho 
II. .n«' of U. pif^i Illative-, in my opinion, practically propose to 

■• aso 



J 



^ confer upon him this power. Tlierofore. under no circumstances 
<> could I. in view of my constitutional obligations, vote for those 
Vi resolutions. But that is not hostility to the President. 

In the same way I regard the recognition of tlio independence of 
the Cubans as an essential in case of intervention. The President 
of the United States thinks it t^honld not be accorded to them. 
That diirerence does not constitute hostility on my part or on the 
part of tho.-;o who agree with me. 

In addition to a groat many other reasons which I can not stop 
to go over, I think the question as to whether recognition either 
accompanies or precedes the act of intervention will have a most 
material bearing upon the possibilitj'. to put it nostronger, of this 
Government being made liable for a part of the Spanish-Cuban 
bonds in the future: and I only romind gentlemen who discuss the 
legal que.stion involved that that isaciuestion not to Ijo decided in 
courts, l.ut it mayhap be decided at the cannon's mouth. 

My colleague [Mr. Clay] has already spoken upon this subject 
and will probably not agani have an opportunity to address the 
Senate upon it. Therefore I take occasion to say for him that as 
to these positions which would make it impossible for me to vote 
for the House resolutions he agrees with me. 

The Senator from Wisconsin [ Mr. Spooner] yesterday made a 
ver}' long and elaborate and able argument on the subject as to 
where resides the prerogative of recognizing the independence of 
a nation. I would have been glad, and had intended, to submit 
some remarks in reply. It is a subject upon which I have be- 
stowed much labor in its investigation, and upon which I have 
very fixed opinions. But it is manifestly now impossible for me 
to do so. 

I desire simply to say one thing, which is that the assumption 
that it is exclusively an Executive prerogative implies necessa- 
rily that the power is lodged in one man to decide with what peo- 
ple of the world this country will maintain or will not maintain 
diplomatic relations. I say, not to go into the argument, that 
that Is a position which is absolutely abhorrent to the genius of 
our institutions, and absolutely inconsistent with the letter and 
spirit of our Constitution, and that it can only find proper place 
in monarchical and absolute governments, where the voice of the 
people and of their representatives is neither heard nor heeded. 
But, ^Ir. President, I can not go into it. However, I desire to 
submit one further reflection in this connection. 

There are two ways in which a declaration of independence may 
he regarded: one where there is no dispute about the fact of inde- 
pendence, the other where there is a dispute about the fact. In 
the one case recognition is a formality; in the other case it is the 
highest act of governmental power. An illustration of the latter 
case is to be had in the declaration of our own independence. 
When we say that a people are free and independent we do not 
necessarily mean that there is no dispute over it or that there is 
no contest over it. We mean to say that thereafter sovereignty 
shall rest there in tlie new nation, and that wo dispute that it 
rests, or that it shall thereafter rest, where it formerly rested. 

When the people of the Colonies decideil in 1 770 and proclaimed 
that they were free, they did not pretend that there was no further 
dispute about that fact, but they simply meant that thenceforth 
they repudiated and denied the sovereignty of the governmeni 
which had theretofore been over them. SVhen France throe years 
thereafter recognized the tiovernment of the United States as freo 

a2C0 



ami iiulrpenrlent, it did not mean to say that all doubt as to 
wht'tht-r that independence had been established was remcved, 
but it simply meant to say that thereafter France recognized the 
(<overei;;nty of this people, and denied that thereafter there was 
or that thereafter there should be, in the recognition of France, 
any K<ivereignty in the British Government over this territory. 
Thert-fon', when we say to-day that we recognize the independ- 
fiiif of th«' Cuban peoi)le, we mean to say that we deny that 
thf'reafter there is or shall be, in our recognition, any sovereignty 
of Spain in that island. 

Mr. President, one word more on the siabject of the rules with 
refen-nto to what shall justify a government in recognizing the 
Jn<l»'|)fndt>ii(o of a new government. All the rules with reference 
to wliat shall ju-tify a government in recognizing the independ- 
i-nce of aiiotlxT nation are made for the benefit of the parent na- 
tion from which the n(;w government is to be sundered. It is to 
jirevi-nt injustice to that parent government; and therefore the 
rare and partinilarity witu which it is laid down that so long as 
Ihero is n possibility, if you please, that that government can re- 
rity, independence of the new government shall not 

.'li . I !■ -MMiit, one-half of the argument of the learned Senator 
from \Vis( onsin yesterday was devoted to that question. While 
I would gladly reply in detail, I think it can all be disposed of 
with one single comment, and that is that, applj-ing as it does 
only to the (luestion of maintaining the rights due to the parent 
I'.it on, to 8«'t} that no injustice is done to the sovereignty of the 
jar. lit nation, it has no place in a consideration where we avow 
lit t :..• same time our purpose to strike down the power andsover- 
t : ' "y of that nation in that connection. 

Mr. President, I would be glad if I could elaborate this subject, 
but it is manifest that I can not do so. I want to say one thing 
more. There never was a man who sat in the Presidential chair 
luoro zealous of the Executive prerogative than Andrew Jackson, 
niid here is what he said about it in bis message to Congress about 
Texas. 1 can not read all of it, only a part of it: 

It Is to lx> prosnmoil that nn no future occasion will a dispute arise, as 

'"■"■■ ' ' '■■■•••■' ■'■■■•• f-nrrr-.l, l>ftween tlip F:xocutive and Legislature in the 

' ' rfC(.;,'iiition. It will always be considered consistent 

\ ristitution, and ranst safe that itshould be exercised, 

\ ^. war, with a previous understanding with that body 

' Ik- declared, and by wh"m all the provisions for sus- 

' ■ Ix* furnished. Its submission to Congress, which 

' ,•,••", l^ran.hes the States of this L'nion and in the other 

1 tin- L luLod States, whore there may bo reasonable ground to 

1 ■ grave a. c(.nse<|Henco, would certainly afford the fullest satis- 

' ■ r r>wn country and a perfect guarantvto all other nations of the 

ju.>iitc uiiU prudence of the measures which might bo adopted. 

And thereafter he sent a message, the last message he ever sent 
to Congress, in which he said he recognized the Republic of Texas 
in resjionse to the resolution which had been passed by Congress, 
r. fo-uizing it, as he said, as a decision of the question. Utter- 
aiK-. s to the same effect are found in other state papers, and the 
doctrine has been repeatedly asserted by Congress, and in one or 
tlie other House thereof. 

Mr. President, aside from the suggestions which have been so 
strongly urged, that it is to our personal interest to recognize the 
independence of the Cubans, the merest justice requires that we 
should do 80. 



There has never been a more heroic struggle for liberty than li;ir 
been made by that pet)plo. There have never been greater sacri- 
fices made by a people to obtain their liberty than have been made 
by them. Thoy have not made the ordinary sacrifices that other 
contestants for liberty have made. Many of us in this Cliambrr 
have known what it was to face the dangers of battle, but no ono 
here has ever faced a danger of battle such as the Cuban patriots 
through long years have faced. No man here has ever entered 
battle knowing tliat if he escaped the bullet and became a captive 
he would meet with death by execution. Yet that has been the 
case of the Cubans in their ten years' war, as well as in the present 
war. 

I read from the American Cyclop?edia, Volume V, page 555, as 
to the execution of Cuban soldiers in five years between 18G8 and 
1)H72, inclusive. I have not the records for the succeeding years of 
that war, or of the present war. 

According toofticiul rojiorts forwarded from Madrid by the United States 
minister, 13,0(K) Culjaus liad been killed in battle up to August, 187:i, besides 
4;>..')(K) i)risoiicrs whom the Spanish minister admitted to have been put to 
death. 

Jly God, Mr. President, can we turn our backs upon men who 
have shown si;ch heroism and such lieroic sacrihcel For one I 
will not, either by my voice or by my vote. 

The Senator from Connecticut [Mr. Pl.vtt] who has just taken 
his seat, sneers at Gomez. Mr. President, if there is a certain 
fact, that fact is the independence of Cuba, and as certain as is 
the independence of Cuba, so certain will it be that in the future 
the name of this man Gomez will be foimd on the list of those im- 
mortal names that were not born to die. It will go down in his- 
tory with the names of Washington and Bolivar, the great libera- 
tors of men from the bondage of tyranny and oppression. 

Mr. President, in the histories of peoples a time comes for sacri- 
fice. Such a time seems now at hand. I doubt not that the North 
is equally ready to make sacrifice with the South, but in the con- 
dition of things the sacrifice to be made in this war must be more 
serious in the South than in the North. The great volume of 
money which is to be spent in carrying on this war will be spent 
at the North and West and will quicken their industries. 

We have few or none of the factories at the South which will 
make the munitions of war necessary to furnish the clothing and 
supplies for the armies, nor are we the large producers of the 
food crops which will be needed to supply them. On the con- 
trary, our enterprises will be largely paralyzed by war, and our 
great product of cotton is to be put to a price that will not only 
not be remunerative, but be an absolute disaster to the man who 
produces it. 

If communication with Cuba, through those who come and go, 
brings the yellow fever to our shores, the South will be the prin- 
cipal sufferer from this cau-se. The first hostile gun that is fired 
will find its echoes in our hills and valleys. If disaster should by 
possibility come, the seaports of the South will be those to bo 
ravaged. 

Nevertheless, Mr. President, our people will not be laggards in 
the struggle. But we do ask this: If we are to make this sacri- 
fice, let it not be a sacrifice in the interests of the holders of the 
Spanish bonds, but let it be a sacrifice in the interest of humanity. 
If this sacrifice has to be made, let it not be for the purjjose of iii- 
vasion and comjuest, but let it be becau.se the great clock of tlie 
a;80 



6 

world lias strnck the morning hour when there shall be born to in- 
depeudciico and freedom a new and heroic people. 

The VICE-PRESIDENT. The Senator from Georgia has one 
minute left of his time, 

Mt. bacon. Mr. President, I utilize that moment by asking 
that there may he read from the desk what I desire to have placed 
in tho perniaiiont records as a piece of evidence relative to the 
((ni'stion whtthir tho Maine was hlown up by torpedoes furnished 
bv the Spanish Government. I desire to call attention simply to 
the fact that what is to be read by the Secretary are extracts from 
two Spanish nf^wspapers published in Madrid. One of them is an 
interview with the former minister of marine under the ministry 
of Canovas, which, of course, preceded by several months the 
time of the explosicm of the Maine. The other is the comment of 
the Imparcial upon the publication of that interview, and express- 
ing regret for it for the reason that it might give rise to the very 
use winch I now make of it. 

Tho VICE-PRESIDENT. The Secretary will read as requested. 

The Secretary read as follows: 

Madrid. April il, ISOS. 

El ITeraliloDo M.atlrid pulilisbesan interview with Admiral Beranger, for- 
mer minister of inariuo, in tho course of which he expressed hiscontidencein 
the nl.ility of tho Spanish navy to win in the event of a war with the United 

•• 'I'l'.^m i<; no fear," said Admiral Beranprer, of onr Cuban ports being ex- 
1 .;;,'lit attack, inasmuch as Havana, Cienfuegos, Nuevitas, and San- 

t I are defended by electric and automatic torpedoes with a large 

I ::f>n. 

Sofii.r Panovas del Castillo, who paid attention to these matters, 
. <urd with invself to send to Cuba 190 torpedoes, whicJi must have 

1- . Ill those liarbors. Chacon, the well known torpedo expert, un- 

uir;^' ic ;oc. .nvev and jilace these engines. 

"I have alroaily s;iid that by sea we shall bo victorious. I will give you 
rny r<>:i-<"ns. The first is tho excellent discipline maintained on our ships; 
t ' ' :-; that on board the American vessels as soon as firing is opened, 

!. -.'t in, since it is common knowledge that their crews comprise 

1 ■ iy nationality. Pitted ship against ship, we have nothing to 

Kl Imparcial, commenting on this interview, says: 

IMPARCIAL RKGRETS TOE CONFESSION'. 

" Tliat those torpedoes should be sent in case war should break out is very 
natural: Imt that as inurh should be admitted at this moment constitutes a 
twi.i '..i iiiijirndcni'e; in the tir.-^t place, because it warns the enemy, and the 
< ' : warned, it will do its best to cripple those defenses; and sec- 

' -<• tho jinifiMvs. availing themselves of the evidence afforded by 

t ' ■ r of marine of tho late Sefior Canovas, will assert that one of the 

torpLJL.c.1 ho describes caused the Maine explosion." 

• ••»»** 



DI.SCLSSIU.N IN THK SF.NATF. OF THE U.VITFD STATES, ArRII., inTH, 
IHOS, O.N THE KKFIXT OF THE VOTE ON THE REPORT OF THE CON- 

rrni:NrK committee on the cuban resolutions. 



Mr. r.AC'ijN. I simply desire to say one thing. The Senator 
froiu Maine |Mr. IIai.e) and the Senator from Wisconsin [Mr. 
Sr<>t>Nr.K| are evidently illuming themselves upon the fact that 
tliey si'din-d the jiassage of these resolutions. I want to call 
nttontion to tho fact that neither the Senator from Maine nor the 
{M-nntor from Wisconsin has ever voted for these resolutions, and 
the liEfoKi) will not show that they did. 

Mr. TELLER. They voted against the resolutions. 

Mr. IJACON. They voted against them every time, and there 



is no place which either of the Senators can pnt his finj?er iipon to 
sliow that he ever voted for the resolutions, and I will prove it 
ri<j:ht here. 

I\Ir. HOAR. Will the Senator from Georgia allow me? 

Mr. BACON. Pardon me for a moment. Permit mo to com- 
plete mv statement, and I will viold to the Senator with pleasure. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER'. The Senator from Georgia de- 
clines to yield. 

Mr. BACON. There has been but one occasion xipon which the 
Senate has voted on the resolutions whicli finally passed tlie Sen- 
ate, and that was on Saturday last, wlien the identical resolu- 
tions were passed by a vote of 07 yeas to 4?1 nays, the only differ- 
ence between the resolutions and those which came baciv from 
the House being the amendments to the first resolution. Tlio 
first resolution related exclusively to the independence of Cuba, 
and of the Rejiublic of Cuba. Now. t4:t> first resolution, which is 
the only one that ever came into dispute, had no reference what- 
ever to intervention or to any action on the part of this Govern- 
ment. It related exclusively to the simple question of the recog- 
nition of the independence of the peo])le of Cuba and to the rec- 
ognition of the Republic of Cuba. The other resolutions are 
these, and I want to read them in order that the point may be 
made clear. I begin with the secor.d resolution that passed the 
Senate on Saturday night last: 

Second. That it is the duty of the United States to demand, and the Gov- 
ernment of the Uniti'd States does licreby demand, that the (lovernmont of 
Spain at once rolmqnish its authority and government in the Island of Cuba 
and withdraw its land and naval forces from Cuba and Cuban waters. 

Thii'd. That the President of the United States be, and ho hereby is, di- 
rected and empowered to use the entire land and naval forces of the United 
States, and to call into the actual service of the United States the militia of 
the several States, to such extent as may be necessary to carry these resolu- 
tions into effect. 

Fourth. That the United States hereby di.sclaims any disposition or inten- 
tion to exercise sovereignty, jurisdiction, or control over said island except 
for the pacification thereof, and asserts its determination when that is ac- 
complished to leave the government and control of the island to its people. 

I assert as a fact, and as a parliamentary fact, that the Senate 
voted on those three resolutions which I have read but once, and 
that was last Saturday night, and that upon that occasion there 
were G7 yeas and 21 nays, and the Senators who then voted in the 
negative have never had an opportunity since to vote in the 
affirmative on it. and have never voted in the affirmative since. 

Mr. SPOONER. Mr. President 

Mr. BACON. Will the Senator from Wisconsin pardon me for 
a moment? Among those 21 nays are the names of the Senator 
from Maine [Mr. H.\leJ and the Senator from Wisconsin [Mr. 
Spooner]. 

Mr. SPOONER. That is right. 

Mr. BACON. The nays aro as follows 

Mr. SPOONER. That is ri^ht 

Mr. BACON. Pardon me. Tlie 21 nays who voted against 
those three resolutions, and who have never since voted for them, 
and who will never again have an oi)portunity to vote for them, 
are as follows: 

Wellington, 

Welmoro, 

White. 



Aldrich, 


Male. 


Morrill. 


Allison, 


Hanna, 


Piatt. Conn 


Burrows, 


liawley. 


Piatt, X. V 


Caflfery, 


}Joar. 


Pritchard, 


Elkins, 


McBride. 


Sew ell. 


Fairbank.s. 


McMillan, 


Spooner, 


3l>C0 







That is the only reoor<l that can be found up to the present date 
whc-re the <iu-stion whether the Senate should or should not pass 
thosi? thrt'O resolutions was ever acted upon by the Senate, and 
upon that occasion the twenty-one names wliich I have mentioned 
were re<'<)rde(l in the ne;,'ative. 

Mr. HOAR. Will theSenator yield to me for a moment? 

Mr. liAt'ON. I will yield for a question, but I do not propose 
to occupy the Hoor any length of time. I do not desire to yield 
for the purpo.se of a .speech. 

Mr. HOAK. I do not wish to make a speech and I do not want 
exactly to i)ut a question. I want to rei)eat a verse of Dr. Watts. 

Mr. BA('(JN. I prefer that the Senator should indulge in his 
poetical diversions in his own time and not in mine, and I object. 

Mr. HOAK. It is so exceedingly apt that 1 should like to do it 
now. 

Mr. BACON. I object to the Senator's proceeding. 

1^1 r. HOAK. Of course, if 

Mr. IJACON. The Senator will have ample oppoi'tunity. He 
is gifted in that direction. He has very large resources. I prefer 
that he use his own time for that purpose. 

Mr. ALLISON. Will the Senator from Georgia yield to me for 
a question? 

Mr. BACON. Yes. sir; for a question. 

Mr. ALL1S(JN. What becomes of those who voted for the 
third reading of the joint resolution and its passage? 

Mr. BACON. The passage? The question of its passage was 
never before the Senate except that one time. 

Mr. ALLISON. Did it not i^ass the Senate after its third read- 
ing vesterdav? 

Mr. TELLER. Mr. COCKRELL, and others. No, no. 

Mr. SPOONER. Mr. President 

Mr. BACON. And the Record will not show it. 

Mr. COCKRELL. It was read the third time but once. No 
measure ever is read the third time but once. 

Mr. SPO: )NEK. Could it possibly have become a law withotit 
the ailoption of the conference report by both Houses? 

Mr. BACON. Of course I am coming to that point. Yester- 
dav the fpiestion was on the conference report. 

Mr. SPOONER. Yes. 

Mr. BACON. And so the conference report 

Mr. SPOONER. Could it ever possibly have become a law. I 
ask the Senator from Georgia, without the adoption in both 
llonse.s of the conference report? 

Mr. COCKRELL. Yes; another conference could have been 
ordered and another conference report adopted. 

Mr. BAC( )N. I am coming to the conference report. The con- 
ference report had no relation whatever to either of the three 
re.solutiDHs which I have read— none whatever. The conference 
coinniittee luid no relation to that, and no vote upon the confer- 
ence report could have any relation or any reference to the 
three resolutions which I have read. I repeat that the Record— 
and everything tliat was done is in print — can not show the place 
where either of the twenty-one Senators whose names I have read 
ever voted for either of these three resolutions. 

•Mr. TILLMAN. Yet the Senator from Maine now claims thev 
did. 

Mr. BAC<3N. Of course. 



Mr. TELLER, I sujjgest to the Senator from Georj:;ia that of 
those three propositious the conference committee had uo possible 
charge. 

Mr. BACON. None on earth. 

Mr. COCKRELL. They conkl not touch them. 

Mr. BACON. It is a matter of elementary knowledge known 
to every Senator here and to every tyro elsewlure that matters of 
difference between the two Houses are the only things which go 
into conference. Nobody can dispute that fact. 

What was the difference between the two Houses? Was there 
any difference between the two Houses as to the three resolutions 
I have read? Not a particle. We passed a joint resolution here 
containing those three resolutions, and our action so far as those 
three resolutions were concerned was final. The joint resolution 
went to the House, and the House passed the same three resolu- 
tions without amendment, and their action as to those three reso- 
lutions was final, and they had no further opportunity to act upon 
them. As to the first resolution 

Mt. FAIRBANKS. Mr. President 

Mr, BACON. Will the Senator from Indiana pardon me for a 
moment? I will then yield with pleasure. 

As to the first resolution, there were two differences. We had 
passed the first resolution on Saturday last in these words: 

That the people of the Island of Cnba arc, and of ri^ht ought to lie, free 
and independent, and that the Government of the United States hereby 
recognizes the Republic of Cuba as the true and lawful government of that 
iiiland. 

That is what we passed. When it went to the House, as to that 
resolution, and that alone, the House made a disagreement. It 
made no disagreement as to either of the other three resolutions 
or any part of them, any line or letter of them, but they did make 
a disagreement as to the £rst resolution. They made two dis- 
agreements. They said, in the first place, that the words "are, 
and " ought to come out, so that it would simply read " That the 
people of the Island of Cuba of right ought to be free." That 
was one difference. We said the words ' ' are, and " ought to be in. 
They said they ought to be out. 

Another difference was that they said that part of it which rec- 
ognized the Republic of Cuba ought to come out. We said it 
ought to be in. There were two differences, and a conference com- 
mittee was asked of the two Houses. For what? To pass on the 
three resolutions I have read? Certainly not. Each House had 
agreed to them. The Senate had agreed to them, although the 
twenty-one gentlemen whose names I have mentioned voted against 
them, and the House had agreed to those three resolutions; but as 
to the fii-st resolution there were two differences, and we had a 
conference for the purpose of settling the differences on the first 
resolution, and that alone. 

Now, I repeat that it is a principle which no man can dispute 
that a conference committee has no jurisdiction over anything ex- 
cept as to the differences between the two Houses, and that those 
differences were such a.s I have here statod and related in no man- 
ner to anything else. Therefore when the conference committee 
reported . 

Mr. SPOONER. If my friend the Senator from Georgia will 
allow me 

Mr. BACON. Permit me to complete the sentence. Therefore 

326U 



10 

wlifii the conference committee reported, they could report noth- 
iu;^ bev<»n<l their jurisdiction. 

Mr. SP(J( )NEK. Of course not. 

Jlr. BACON. Tliey attempted nothing heyond their jurisdic- 
tion. Tlit-y simply attempted to compose the differences between 
the two Hou.ses, to comi)osc the differences as to those two amend- 
ments to the lirst resolution, and when thoy came in and when 
wo refused to agree to the recommendation of the conference com- 
mittee, we made no refusal as to the three resolutions with which 
they had nothing to do, and when we agreed to their recommen- 
dation we did not agree to anything which related to the three 
resolutions with which thoy had nothing to do. 

Mr. SPOONER. My friend the Senator from Georgia, who is 
not only very able, but always frank, will agree that whatever 
measure may be passed by the two Houses of Congress, whether 
there may be one resolution or two or three or four or ten, wlien 
as to one of them there arises a difference, none can become 
effective without an agreement as to that difference. If there is 
a deadlock between the two Houses as to a single difference con- 
cerning one of a dozen resolutions, it kills the whole business. 

Mr, BACON. Unless there is a final agreement, of course. 

31 r. SPOONER. I say if there is a failure to agree. 

Mr. COCKRELL. There was no failure to agree. It went right 
back into conference. 

Mr. BACON. When the Senator from Wisconsin wishes to ask 
me a question, I am glad to yield, but I do not think he ought to 
stop me to argue the matter. 

Mr. SPOONER. That is right. 

Mr. FAIRBANKS. Mr. President- 
Mr. CHANDLER. I ask the Senator from Georgia 

Mr. BACON. Tiie Senator from Indiana some time ago asked 
me to yield, and I now yield to him. 

Mr. FAIRBANKS. I ask the Senator from Georgia whether or 
not a vote in favor of concurrence in the final conference report 
was not in eft'ect a vote for the various resolutions to which the 
Senator has just alluded? 

Mr. BACON. It might have been in spirit; it was not in fact. 

Mr. FAIRBANKS. Was not a vote for or against concurrence 
in the final conference report in efl'ect a vote for or against the 
resolutions? 

Mr. BACON. No; bv no means. 

Mr. FAIRBANKS. Mr. President 

Mr. BACON. The Senator will pardon^ jne for just a moment. 
It was by no means, as 1 was ondea\ oring to show when I yielded 
to the Senator from Wisconsin. The conference committee has 
no jurisdiction outside of the differences between the two Houses, 
tlie matter in difference between the two Houses. Their report 
can cover notliing except as to matters of difference between the 
two Houses; and therefore, inexorably, our vote can not have ref- 
erence to anything except as to matters in difference between the 
two Houses. 

•Mr. SP(JONER. Unless it is composed, the whole business 
drojis. 

.M r. P..\Ct )N. I yield now to the Senator from New Hampshire. 
M r. CHAN DLEK. I should like to ask the Senator from Geor- 
g-a t.) state liero why lie and I and other Senators voted not to 
concur in tlie House amendments? 



11 

Mr. SPOONER. I riso to a point of order. I do not exactly 
know how the Senator from Georgia can tell why the Senator from 
New Hampshire did anything, 

Mr. BACON. I will state why I did, and will leave out tho 
Senator from New Hampshire. 

Mr. CHANDLER. Ihat does not concern tho Senator from 
Wisconsin. 

Mr. SPOONER. If the Senator from New Hampshire 

Mr. CHANDLER. The Senator from Geor.i,na and I had a com- 
mon purpose in those votes, and I propose to ask the Senator a 
question about it, if the Senator from Wisconsin will let me. 

Mr. SPOONER. Mr. President 

Mr. CH^ySTDLER. If tho Senator from Wisconsin would not 
interrupt me except with my consent, I would be very much 
oblin;ed to him. 

Mr. SPOONER. I beg pardon. 

Mr. CHANDLER. I ask the Senator what the assumed motive 
was in voting to nonconcur in the House amendments? 

Mr. SPOONER. I rise to a parliamentary inquirv. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator fro'm Wisconsin 
will state it. 

Mr. SPOONER. I should like to ask the Senator from New 
Hampshire, if it will not be an unparliamentary interruption, 
what he means by an assumed motive as a basis? 

Mr. BACON. I will ask that both Senators will 

Mr. CHANDLER. If the Senator from Wisconsin is done and 
will kindly sit down, I will go on with my business. 

Mr. SPOONER. I will sit down when the Senator answers tho 
question. 

Mr. BACON. Mr. President, I claim the floor. 

Mr. TILLMAN. If the Senator from Georgia will 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Georgia has 
the floor. 

Mr. TILLMAN. Mr. President 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Georgia has 
the floor. 

Mr. BACON. It is very much easier for each gentleman to 
argue in his own time 

Mr. TILLMAN. I am merely trying to answer the Senator 
from Wisconsin. 

Mr. CHANDLER. I will ask the Senator 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does the Senator from Georgia 
yield to the Senator from New Hampshire? 

Mr. BACON, Yes, if I may yield to him alone. 

Mr. SPOONER. Mr. President 

Mr. BACON. But I see that that contingency has already fallen 
through, 

Mr, SPOONER, Mr. President 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair must sustain the right 
to tho floor of the Senator who has it. The Senator from Georgia 
has the floor, and he yields to tho Senator from New Hampshire 
for a question. 

Mr, SPOONER, Mr. President 

Mr. CHANDLER. I do not yield to the Senator from Wiscon- 
sin. 

Mr. SPOONER. I have not asked the Senator to. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New Hamp- 
shire declines to yield, 
o2r.O 



12 

Mr. CDANDLER. I will ask ray question of the Senator from 
GforKia in an^.ther form. Was it not the object in voting not to 
rnncnr in the Hou.se anienflments to .secure, if possible, action by 
till- III. use receding from those amendments? 

I^Ir. BACON. Most undoubtedly. It could have been nothing 
cl.'^e. 

Mr. CH ANDLER. "Was not that the object of every vote agamst 
concurring and in favor of insisting? 
Mr. HA('( )X. Undoubtedly. 

Mr. CHANDLER. Then I will ask the Senator this question: 
Wheth.T, no matter how long that voting continued, tlfe object 
and purpose of it was not the same— to secure, if possible, the ac- 
tion of the House receding from those amendments? 

Mr. BACON. The purpose in each case was to secure the action 
which wc had originally taken, and to embody that as law, which 
action was tlie only part about which there was any difference, 
and which action was one relating exclusively to the question of 
the independence of the people of Cuba and of the Republic of 
Cuba. 
Mr. President. I did not ri.se with any expectation— I am occu- 

pvitig the floor bv the courtesy of the Senator from Missouri ■ 

"Mr, COCKRELL. Proceed. 

Mr. BACON. I rose with no expectation of occupying so much 
t ime. I desired to call attention from the Record to the fact that 
tlie Senat(.rs who now claim that they alone passed the joint reso- 
lution, that tho.se who have occupied the floor of the Senate for 
this purpose, have had but one opportunity to vote for the resolu- 
tion, and that then, so far from availing themselves of that oppor- 
tuiiitv, the RiX'ORD shows they voted against it. 

Mr! SPOONER. Will my 'friend the Senator from Georgia 
allow me to interrupt him for a moment? 
:^Ir. liACON. For a question? 
Mr. SPO(3NER. No. 
Mr. BAC( )N. Then I decline to yield. 

Mr. SPOONER. The Senator does me injustice if he imputes 
to me the jiosition or declaration that I voted for these resolutions. 
Mr. MONEY. The Senator from Georgia says the Senator from 
Wisconsin did not. 

Mr. SP(,)ONER. I have not said that I voted for the resolu- 
tiims. 
Mr. BAC( )N. Very well. 

Mr. SPOONER. 1 do not want the Senator 

Mr. 15A('( )N. I will take it back, if the Senator admits he did 
not. If ho admits that he did not, what I said does not apply to 
him. 

Mr. SPOONER. Of course, when these resolutions 

Mr. BA( "( )N. Now, Mr. President 

Mr. SPO()NER. If my friend will i»ermit me as a matter of 
fuirne.-.s, I will state that when these resolutions were before the 
Sfiiate I did not vote for tl'.em. 

Mr. BA( "( )N. The Ri;c'( HiD shows that the Senator did not. 
Mr. SIM )( )NI:R. I voted against them. 
Mr. B.\( '( )N. So the RixoKD shows. 

Mr. Sl'OoNKR. I voted against the first one becaiase I regarded 
it as a legislative falsehood, declaring a fact which 1 did not be- 
lieve tu be a fact. 

Mr. B.\C(JN. I voted for it because I regarded it as a legisla- 
tive truth. 



13 

Mr. 8P00NER. I voteil against the last one, wliicli is what is 
called an ultimatum, upon the jrround— I may have been mistaken, 
but 1 was sincere about it, and as Rood a friend of Cuba, too, 
as my friend the Senator from New Hampshire [Mr. ChandlekJ, 

not talkini? so much about it. however 

Mr. BACON. Mr. President 

Mr. SPOONER. Pardon me for a moment. 
Mr. BACUN. I thought the Senator from Wisconsin was 
throui^h. 

I*Ir. SPOONER. No. I did that because I believed it was not 
a function of Congress to declare an ultimatum against a foreign 
government, and that it was in no .sense a law. But when the time 
came that there was an agreement on the main proposition be- 
tween the two Houses and a disagreement as to one point, even 
though, if it had been left to me, I would not have voted for it, I 
yielded. 

Mr. BACON. But the Senator never had the second oppor- 
tunity to vole for it. 

Mr. SPOONER. Wait a moment. I yielded. I voted at the 
end, when the conference committee had reported an agreement, 
for the report in order to compose the dilTerences, in order to bring 
about a legislative adjustment between the two Houses, when I 
feared there might be no other way. In a sense I voted for some- 
thing which I did not believe. I voted for something which I had 
denounced upon the floor of the Senate; and I did it not because I 
am fond of swallowing, or am willing to do so ordinarily, my own 
words, or in any sense stultifying myself; but I did it— and I thank 
my friend the Senator from Georgia for permitting me to say it— 
because I regarded it as a great and momentous transaction. I 
thought small differences of opinion ought not to hold us apart, and 
that we should, if it were possible to do it, come to an agreement 
that something might emanate from the legislative department to 
the President, that the reconcentrados who were starving might 
be relieved, and that the people who claim to love Cuba so much 
might afford the President an opportunity to aid Cuba. 

Mr. BACON. I want to make two remarks in regard to what 
the Senator has just said. In the first place, I have labored with 
considerable earnestness to prove that the Senator has never voted 
for these three important resolutions. 1 think I have proved it; 
and in the second place the Senator has admitted it that he never 
did. 

Mr. SPOONER. If the Senator 

]\Jr. BACON. I object to the Senator taking me entirely off 
the floor. , _ 

Mr. SPOONER. If the Senator will allow me one moment, I 
will not interrupt him again. 

The PRESIDING- OFFICER. Does the Senator from Georgia 
yield to the Senator from Wisconsin? 

Mr. BACON. I said I was going to make two remarks, and he 
has allowed me to make one. I will repeat the lir.st one, as the 
Senator was engaged in the conference he was having with the 
Senator from Massachusetts [Mr. HoarJ, and possibly did not 
hear it. I said that I had labored with considerable earnestness 
to endeavor to prove that the Senator from Wisconsin had never 
voted for the three important resolutions. 

Mr. SPOONER. I admit it. , . , , o . v, ^ 

Mr. BACON. And I went on to say, which the Senator did not 

32C0 



14 

hcar.anfl which I am now repeating? for his benefit, that I had not 
oiilv'i.rovea it. Imt that the Senator now admitted it. 

Mr. SP( )ONEK. I admitted it from the beginning. 

Mr. BACCJN. Very well. 

The second remark I desire to make in regard to the Senator's 
remarks during the interrxipti<m is this: The Senator in the course 
of his interject ion. and in the latter part of it, went on to say why- 
he had voted for the resolutions, although he did not agree with 
them. I say the Senator is mistaken. He never voted for them. 

]\Ir. SPO(")NER. I never said I did. 

]\Ir. BACON. I think the Record will show that the Senator 
did. 

Mr. SPOONER. I said I voted for the conference report, Avhich, 
if adopted, would adopt the three resolutions for which 1 had not 
voted. 

Mr. BACON. The Senator i8 entirely wrong. The conference 
report had no reference to these three resolutions, and if there is 
anything which can be demonstrated in logic it has been demon- 
strated and need not be repeated, that the conference report had 
nf. thing to do with these three resolutions, because there was no 
difference between the two Houses on the three resolutions. The 
conference report was limited to the differences on the first reso- 
lution. 

Mr. SPOONER. How could they have been passed without an 
agreement to some conference rei^ortV 

Mr. BACON. The conference report simply related to those 
differences as to 

Mr. Si'OONER rose. 

Mr. BACON. The Senator will certainly permit me to make a 
statement without interrupting me before I got through a sentence 
even. The trouble is, the Senator is engaged in a colloquy, and 
in the midst of a number of his advisers around he does not hear 
what I reply, and then he makes an interruption which relates to 
something 1 did not sav. 

Mr. SPOONER. I did not utter a word. I simi)ly shook my 
finger. 

Mr. BACON. The Senator shook it in a way so that I thought 
possibly it might go off. The proposition is a plain one, that the 
time when the Senate passed upon these three resolutions, which 
have probably now become a law by the signature of the President, 
was on the evening of Saturday, the Itith day of April; that the 
Senate voted upon^hein then, and has never voted upon them at 
any other time. 

Mr. FAIRBANKS. If the Senator from Georgia will allow me 
.just a (juestion, I will ask him whether the resolutions which have 
now probably become a law would have become a law except 
in i)ursnance of the vote found on page 44G1 of the Congres- 
sional Record? 

Mr. BACON. The question which the Senator from Indiana 
asks mo is, in sitbstance, exactly the same question that the Sena- 
tor from Wisconsin asked me, and which I was trying to answer 
at the time when the Senator from Indiana interrupted me for the 
purpose of asking it again. It is necessary to have a logical se- 
(lueiico in a statement of a proposition, and before I can get to the 
c(3nclus;on tho Senator repeats identically the same question. I 
wa.s coming exactly to the (juestion as to w^hat was the effect of 
tlje vote of last night, if the Senator will permit me to get that 
far. 
a:.'00 



15 

Mr FAIRBANKS. I am wiUin- that the Senator should an- 
RwPr "ono incniirv or the other. Either will satisfy lue. 

Ylr B VCON^ I will certainly do so if tlie S^Muitor will give ino 
anoppoHunity.at least to the best of my abihty; whether satis- 
factorily to others or not, they must ]udu'0. 

I reneat the proposition in order to state it properly. The only 
timrtKethrJo resolutions which relate to intervention in Cuba 
L.^e ever boon passed upon by the Senate was Saturday evemng; 
tlmt thronly diirerences between the two Houses were as to the 
fiSt resoli^t ion i-elatinir entirely to the matter of independence, 
^nd t itt thev did not relate in any manner to either of those tlireo 
p??posu\onsTthat°tipon those differences the -n «jnce c^^^^^^^ 
tee was appointed, wliose duties were limited to those dim rences 
who'e?epoXmust havebeea limited to those differences, and that 
'vhe?itc^imftothe Senate for a vote the votes were limited to 
tboS differences. In other words, when we had the vote last 
ni-ht we dkl not vote for these three resolut'.ons in any manner 
Sfeectlv or indirectly. We could not change them. Our action 
«i to theS h d been final. The action of the House as to them 
£ad beertina We could not amend them. The House cou d not 
amend them The conference committee could not amend them. 

^' M? f'uRbSks^'wIII the Senator allow me t^o a^c h;m a 
nuest\on^ Woiild the ioint resolution have gone to the T resident 
for his signature and have become a law without the vote of last 

^'Mr'BlCON. Mostnndoubtedlynot: and if the Senator had 
permitted me. that was the next step which 1 was about to take 

'tl "FlmSNKrS'ask'the Senator, then, if the joint resolu- 

ticmwoillnofha?ebecomealaw 

vvhether he aided in making it a law by his vote aga nst it.^ 

ilr B \CON If we had prevailed, it would have become a law 
.iust ihe same. Those three resolutions would have become a 

^''\V^"#n^VMr%POOXER Mr. CULLOM. and others. Oh, no! 

a;--1?c§N iS^xol^^^^^^^^ pardon. ^ Possibly I might 

he alioTvedVo state aVoposition before the Senators enter their 

iudgment and verdict finally. n „*■ t f^'f o+ lihprtv to 

Mr. SPOONER. It was so plain a case that I fe.t at libeitj to 

do it. 

Mr E lCON'''Tlv?c^fferences between the two Houses rehjted 
exclush-eiy to he first resolution. If we had prevailed he mat- 
ters S which the House objected would ^^'^^'^ ^l^i^f J A^^t\er 
in ,it resolution and it would have become law ^yltll that ^'1^61 
nt So the^oint resolution would not have been defeated it 
we hid prevailed I am speaking about the Turpie amendment. 
On he other h?nd when the Turpie amendment was not per- 

,i-iP7if l^nt under our action, whichever side pievaiieu. int luilc 
SSolutimis wouM have become law, just as they have becoino 

Now, Mr. President, one other word and I will stop, iue bui 



LIBKRKY Uh CUNbKLbb 

ll'illllllilllllllllllll 



013 785 907 5 



16 



ator from ]\Iaine in the course of his remarks twitted the Senator 
from ^Missouri with the fact that tlie Democrats in the House had 
voted in the affirmative on the conference report and the Demo- 
crats in the Senate had voted in the negative on the conference 
report. I desire to point, I think with perfect ease, to the fact 
that in each case the Democrats, both in the Senate and the House, 
voted for the accomplishment of practically the same purpose. 
When the House agreed to the conference report, they had no vote 
to make on the Turpie amendment, becaiise they had never agreed 
to the Turpie amendment. Consequently, it not having been 
recommended that they should agree to that amendment, it was 
not before them in any way. Tlie House had stricken out the 
words "are and,'" and they were called upon by the conference 
report to restore those words. Now, when they voted to restore 
those words, they voted that the resolutions should declare 

Mr. H(JAR. Who has stricken them oiit? 

Mr. BACON. Pardon me a moment. When they voted to re- 
store the words "are and'' they voted that the declaration should 
read that "the people of Cuba are and of right oxight to be free." 
Conseqiiently their vote in that instance was in the interest of 
the independence of Cuba. 

On the other hand, when the report came to the Senate for our 
action, we had nothing to do with the voting on the question as to 
restoration of those words, because we had already put them in 
and we were not called upon to restore them. What wo were 
called upon to do was to recede from the proposition that the Re- 
public of Cuba should be recognized as free and independent: 
and when we voted "nay,"' we voted in the interest of the inde- 
pendence also of the Ciiban Republic. 

So, while the House voted in the affirmative on the conference 
report, they voted in the interest of the independence of Cuba; and 
in the Senate, while we voted in the negative on the conference re- 
port, we equally voted in the interest of the independence of Cuba. 
They voted on one proposition and we voted on another, and both 
propositions were included in the conference report. 

C-2IJ0 




LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 
i ! ii||| ill',' nil 1 1 Mil { 



I III III! 

013 785 907 5 P 



Hollinger Corp. 
pH8.5 



